Melanie Kipp
Forum Pro
OK... well, it's a great photo... I understand about staying behind the lens!
Please visit me at:
http://www.caughtintimephotography.com
--
Please visit me at:
http://www.caughtintimephotography.com
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Digital Color Management
- Thread starter Marc Aguilera
- Start date
Lets talk some nuts and bolts. Outdoor Photography doesn't present too many problems as far a color correction is concerned. If the grass is not quite green enough or the sky is a little too blue, who would notice? The photographer? Yea, but those problems don't ruin a image, it might even help it. The same thing with other non-living subjects. The real problems start when you work with flesh tones. If the flesh tone is off even a little, anyone who knows the subject is going to see a big problem. I struggled with this for what seems like an eternity. I finally spent some money on a spyder and some profiling software, went through alot of paper and ink, hours of tweaking and now can produce images the are OK. Profiles are a pain. A profile that is good for one image, paper, ink, printer combanation is not necessarly good on another. That is my experence anyway. So, if you want to help out, figure out a way to GREATLY simplify the entire process, un-complicate it enough so that all our time is not spent trying to figure it ALL out. Oh, if you have any shortcuts to profiling, please let us know. I am sure we could all use the money we spend on tweaking on something else.
I completely agree with what you say, Cory. Having achieved a colour managed workflow, matching my prints to what I see on my monitor is rarely an issue. This is a major saving in time and money (and sanity;-)).
As for the expense, I'm not sure that I agree with you that it is necessarily as expensive as '3k for hardware'. My biggest expenditure to getting a CM set-up was buying the full version of Adobe Photoshop. I've subsequently discovered that other, cheaper, programs also claim to support the use of ICC profiles.
I print photos using an Epson Stylus Photo 1200 with a third party glossy photo paper.
Here's roughly what I've spent on CM. I'm in the UK, but I've converted GBP to USD for the international audience. Bear in mind that in the UK we often pay rip-off prices compared to the US as well.
(1) ColorVision Spyder + PhotoCal bundle - about USD 250
(2) Custom printer profile (from ChroMix) for my favourite third party paper- USD 99
(3) Adobe PS 6 - about USD 600 (after the rebate for 5 LE).
After trying to make my own custom profiles, I would strongly recommend obtaining one from a source such as ChroMix. It's less trouble and more accurate than a scanner-based solution.
I don't yet use a digicam - I scan negs and slides with a Nikon LS40. So the expense of profiling a digicam hasn't hit me yet.
I'm not a Pro photographer, but I'm very fussy about getting the colours of my prints just right (i.e. to match what's on the screen).
The biggest issue IMO with CM at present is that it's not easy to find out about . There's not yet a decent book on the subject that covers all the issues for the non-expert. Having said that, Bruce Fraser and Ian Lyons (amongst others) do a good job in filling the gaps via their web pages.
Just my 2 pen'orth...
Alan Rew
As for the expense, I'm not sure that I agree with you that it is necessarily as expensive as '3k for hardware'. My biggest expenditure to getting a CM set-up was buying the full version of Adobe Photoshop. I've subsequently discovered that other, cheaper, programs also claim to support the use of ICC profiles.
I print photos using an Epson Stylus Photo 1200 with a third party glossy photo paper.
Here's roughly what I've spent on CM. I'm in the UK, but I've converted GBP to USD for the international audience. Bear in mind that in the UK we often pay rip-off prices compared to the US as well.
(1) ColorVision Spyder + PhotoCal bundle - about USD 250
(2) Custom printer profile (from ChroMix) for my favourite third party paper- USD 99
(3) Adobe PS 6 - about USD 600 (after the rebate for 5 LE).
After trying to make my own custom profiles, I would strongly recommend obtaining one from a source such as ChroMix. It's less trouble and more accurate than a scanner-based solution.
I don't yet use a digicam - I scan negs and slides with a Nikon LS40. So the expense of profiling a digicam hasn't hit me yet.
I'm not a Pro photographer, but I'm very fussy about getting the colours of my prints just right (i.e. to match what's on the screen).
The biggest issue IMO with CM at present is that it's not easy to find out about . There's not yet a decent book on the subject that covers all the issues for the non-expert. Having said that, Bruce Fraser and Ian Lyons (amongst others) do a good job in filling the gaps via their web pages.
Just my 2 pen'orth...
Alan Rew
C
Cory
Guest
The issue with the cost is that this is the amount to buy a hardware/software solution for creating your own profiles. You can buy printer profiles froma a second party, but it becomes a cost and upkeep issue if you print on many different papers. Also, when you change ink, you need to re-linearize your profile since the inks vary from batch to batch. This gets too costly for people to do if you don't own the set up yourself.
I agree that PS is a must, but it is not made for creating profiles, only using them.
All input devices can be improved with profiles, scanners are no different than a digicam in that regards. If you had your scanner profiled you would see a difference in your images when you opened them in PS and assigned this custom profile.
You are absloutly right. This is all way too hard. But since every device is different and thus has varied ways of capturing things, this is very hard to make simple.
Here is my simple solution(but it will never happen)
All camera manufacturers would profile each and every camera they sell and make that the camer's profile so that all files that come out of it are embeded with it. Oh well, we can dream can't we?
Carry on...
Cory
http://www.pixelagogo.com
Sorry about the misunderstanding: I thought that the question was the cost of utilising CM per se, without necessarily making your own profiles. Of course if you want to make your own then for high quality results you're looking at (e.g.) Gretag Macbeth Eye-One Pro + Eye-One Match and maybe Gretag Macbeth Profile Editor as well, which adds up to big bucks.
I still think that for someone who's new to CM, and just getting to grips with it, then having a custom printer profile made will make it easier to get started, as making your own printer profiles is a process full of pitfalls for the unwary ;-)
Of course I am in the fortunate position of having 'settled' on one particular ink/paper combination for the bulk of my output. I haven't noticed any changes from one Epson colour cartridge to the next (yet).
Having said that I consider USD 99 good value for a quality profile made with a spectrophotometer.
Yes of course you are right. I'm just trying to warn the unwary that they can't use any old program for printing in a CM workflow. Yet another pitfall!
I'm using the Nikon-supplied 'augmented large gamut RGB' profile, which gets the colours in the right ball-park, after which only minor tweaks are needed.
I've looked at scanner-profiling solutions and the ones that I've seen are rather expensive for my taste. There again, as I'm not a Pro, I don't mind spending a certain amount of time colour correcting my scans in PS. Once it looks OK on the screen, I know it'll look OK in print
Alternatively we need affordable camera profiling packages, maybe.
BTW, Bruce Fraser has a new book on CM (Real World Color Management
) due out later this year, which may fill the gap that I'm referring to. See
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201773406/qid%3D1015447813/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F0%5F1/102-4856492-3161747
Regards
Alan Rew
jim collum
Well-known member
uh, speaking for myself, as a outdoor photographer, color management is crititcal to my printing. i've probably spent as much in hardware/software to get it right as i have for the actual printer (an Epson 9500).
I'm also aware of a good number of professional landscape photographers that would probably agree with me (I know Joseph Holmes wrote Colorblind Proveit, and is a major contributor to ProfileCity.com) and Stephen Johnson labors for hours over profile creation to get his colors right.
jim collum
http://www.jcollum.com
I'm also aware of a good number of professional landscape photographers that would probably agree with me (I know Joseph Holmes wrote Colorblind Proveit, and is a major contributor to ProfileCity.com) and Stephen Johnson labors for hours over profile creation to get his colors right.
--
jim collum
http://www.jcollum.com
U
Uwe Steinmueller
Guest
It could not be further of the truth.
You are very right that no one knows what the sky and the green really looks like. I call that subjective WB and color.
But you work hard that your images get the subjective right color and contrast on your monitor in Photoshop. Then you want just to print and enjoy your "perfect" prints. Here you need color management and I don't know of any serious landscape photographer who prints digitally and is not aware of color management and if not they know they have a problem.
Uwe
You are very right that no one knows what the sky and the green really looks like. I call that subjective WB and color.
But you work hard that your images get the subjective right color and contrast on your monitor in Photoshop. Then you want just to print and enjoy your "perfect" prints. Here you need color management and I don't know of any serious landscape photographer who prints digitally and is not aware of color management and if not they know they have a problem.
Uwe
Marc Aguilera
Member
Robert,
Thank-you for the kind words. Our door is always open.
--
Marc Aguilera
Senior Software Application Engineer
http://www.color.com
858-207-6335
Marc Aguilera
Member
--
I couldn't agree with you more. Color Management in the sense of an ICC workflow is a terrible pain. I like to think of it as similar to Yoga. Everyone knows that Yoga is difficult to do and takes some time to get it right. But deep down you know it would be good for overall health. With practice and patience, you begin to be more limber and feel better. The ICC workflow is very similar. At first it is awkword and you don't really do it right even though you think your doing it right. It sometimes takes an experienced ICC integrator to show you your way. But sometimes you can learn it yourself. The point is, and we can go into the particulars at will, is that the ICC workflow is healthy and extremely beneficial, its just takes dedication. In the case of skin tones, skin tones are based on degrees of saturation from neutrality. Neutrality is based on CMY balance. If you are not neutral to begin with, you cant control the saturation. This is known as linearity. By nature, a default or canned profile is rarely neutral or linear. It can't be becasue its based on averages. A profile is based on actuals. With Color Management tools you can control unlinearity. A good profile will give you accurate skin tones becasue it will render the source values as close as possible to thier inevitable calculated equivalents. A profile will serve to calculate your source colors more accurate to thier converted equivalents. Be patient and keep learing. I too come from a long photography background and understand the photo world. Photo people want procedures they can master. The ICC workflow is a paradigm, the issues are due to the fact the procedures in the paradigm iare still evolving. We are working on making the process more simple, but, the real challenge lies in making it work in the individual workflow.
Marc Aguilera
Senior Software Application Engineer
http://www.color.com
858-207-6335
U
Uwe Steinmueller
Guest
OK:
Uwe
Who is expecting automatic and perfect results will be very disappointed. But I believe that only CM will get you closer to match your screen and awy from only guessing.
Uwe
Marc Aguilera
Member
Perfection is a tall order, and your right, if your expecting it, you will be disapointed. The perception of Color is SUBJECTIVE. It depends on the light source, object, and observer. Digital color is numbers that are also goverened by the same three principles, light source, object, observer. With the monitor, we can calibrate the light source, i.e D50 or D65. With the printer, we can record its degree of unlinearity and produce a mathmatical adjustment to correct for that unlinearity and when in use be able to compress/clip colors into its space based on real measurements. This is esentially what a profile does. It first boils down to measurement. Without the measurement of color you will never be able to control it.
Marc
Marc
jim collum
Well-known member
This isn't new in the realm of photography.. just a little easier. I can remember spending hours testing emulsions for film. paper/chemistry combinations, with a transmission and reflection densitometer and pulling my hair out trying to get a close match from transparency to cibachrome. (not to mention the testing of the contrast and color masks that had to happen as well).
given the way it was, this is much easier. (but still not perfect :^)
given the way it was, this is much easier. (but still not perfect :^)
Hi Marc:
I have not experienced any problems at all when it comes to color management!
Carefully reading all the articles by Andrew Rodney (aka Digital Dog) and Ian Lyons really paid off big time for me.
Used Adobe Gamma to set up my workspace – I am set up to run at Gamma =2.2. I double and triple checked the operating gamma value using a photometer (had to resort to a $6000 Minolta portable digital photometer that I borrowed from work).
Prior to loading Photoshop, I confirmed my CRT’s color temperature using the Minolta photometer to measure x-y chromaticity values – turns out Viewsonic’s hardware setting for 6500 °K was pretty much right on target. I had no reason to manually set the display’s color temperature.
Measured my CRT’s phosphor chromaticity coordinates using same Minolta photometer – input that data to Photoshop’s Monitor RGB. Note - Viewsonic’s chromaticity values provided in their ICC file were incorrect (if I remember correctly, one of the green coordinates was way off). Note - this was a significant step towards achieving WYSIWYG performance between my display and printer.
My Photoshop work space is sRGB for two of my cameras, and Adobe RGB (1998) for output from my scanner (LS2000 color management is OFF during scans). I carefully confirmed the color temperature of my workspace – yep, I used the same Minolta meter.
I use an Epson 1270 printer and only one type of paper – Epson HW Matte. The profile for this printer’s ink and paper combination was downloaded from Ian Lyon’s site (thank you Ian). Note - I never could find the profiles available at Ian’s site on any Epson site throughout the world.
Mike Chaney made life easy for me when he added ICC smarts to Qimage Pro. I simply dial in the correct work space and use Ian Lyon’s printer profile (thank you Mike, and thanks again Ian).
I make sure my display remains stable over time by not driving the display hard. I run at 1024x768 and a 60 Hz refresh rate. My contrast setting on the display is only 85% - I have more display luminance than I need because of the slow writing rate associated with the 1024x768 in conjunction with the 60 Hz refresh. Every three months, I bring the Minolta home and verify my display is okay.
I’m happy to report that I enjoy perfect WYSIWYG performance; it only took about five or six (maybe seven) months to get there – this was a cakewalk through the park – no problems at all. Thanks - I appreciate your offer to help, but no thanks, I’m doing just fine. Actually, I don’t understand why some folks out there are having problems with color management.
Joe Kurkjian
Marc Aguilera
Member
Joe,
You should write a book, or better yet a bible.
Anyway, like I said in prior posts, color management is about:
Understanding the relationship between light source, object, and observer.
Measuring and quantifying color
Interfacing these values in a givenl workflow.
Note: The biggest success stories stem from those who work in a closed loop such as yourself. For some, they have to print onto a multitude of papers, all of which have different gamuts. Remember, CM is also something that transends closed loop senerios. What if your images need proofing for press? How do you re-appropriate color from web - offset - newsprint - or wide format inkjet? How do you deliver CMYK to a client? These are just a few of the possible questions.
Also, thank someone at your work for allowing you the use of the Minolta Meter. There will never be a substitute for excellent color measuring devices.
BTW. Nice work on having no color issues. You are fortunate.
--
Marc Aguilera
Senior Software Application Engineer
http://www.color.com
858-207-6335
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum